DFC’s Accountability Mechanism Must Be Strong Enough to Hold DFC Accountable

In 2024, four young Kenyan women who survived sexual abuse as children at Bridge International Academies turned to the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation’s (DFC) Independent Accountability Mechanism (IAM) seeking accountability for the harm they suffered.

The case concerned a U.S.-financed project. In 2013, DFC’s predecessor, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), provided Bridge with a $10 million loan to expand and operate low-cost private schools in Kenya.

The compliance investigation was completed in March 2025. The IAM concluded that DFC failed to identify, assess, and monitor child sexual abuse risks in the Bridge project, and that these failures contributed to harm suffered by children. It issued two sets of recommendations, institutional reforms to strengthen due diligence, child safeguarding, monitoring, and internal expertise; and survivor-focused measures calling for engagement with the affected survivors and consideration of remedies, including compensation, support, and access-to-justice pathways. 

But an accountability investigation only matters if an institution responds to what it finds.

DFC Management took more than a year to produce its response. The Management Action Plan (MAP) approved by the DFC Board on April 17, 2026 does not address the IAM's recommendations concerning remedy for the survivors. Management also failed to consult the survivors in development of the plan.

This is not simply a dispute over one Management Action Plan, it raises a systemic question: what happens when DFC's independent accountability mechanism finds that DFC contributed to harm, but DFC Management does not meaningfully respond?

The problem is compounded by the IAM's limited capacity. DFC reported in its FY25 Annual Activities Report that the IAM ended the fiscal year with only one employee, the Director, despite a record number of eligible requests and a growing caseload. At the same time, DFC is expanding its investment capacity, making a strong accountability function more important, not less.

The IAM Terms of Reference, approved by the DFC Board in December 2024 establish the mechanism's mandate, governance, disclosure, compliance, monitoring, and reprisal protections. They are intended to ensure that people affected by DFC-supported projects have a meaningful avenue to raise concerns and seek accountability.

DFC now has a new IAM Director. This transition presents an important opportunity to strengthen the mechanism. We will be watching closely to ensure that the new Director upholds the IAM's TORs, provides strong leadership, and has the resources and institutional support needed to do the job. Pending cases must be concluded in accordance with the TORs, with affected people meaningfully engaged and protected throughout the process.

That is why we are asking Congress to engage with DFC. Not just about the Bridge survivors, but about the future of accountability at DFC.

We are calling on Congress to ensure that DFC Management respects IAM findings and procedures, survivors are meaningfully involved in remedy discussions, and the IAM has sufficient full-time staff to carry out its mandate effectively.

DFC is becoming a larger and more consequential U.S. development finance institution. Its accountability mechanism must be capable of keeping pace.

Read the Congressional Letter here

‍